Model predictive control with self-learning capability for automated demand response in buildings

• An MPC integrating a Moving Horizon Estimator is developed for a house. • The MPC is as a key enabler of a demand response strategy at Energy Community level. • Different flexibility scenarios are simulated and compared to a baseline MPC. • The MPC can provide a 10% flexibility request with no thermal discomfort. • The MPC is able to shift up to 13.08% of energy from peak periods to valley periods. This paper presents an optimal management strategy, called Building Optimizer , based on a Model Predictive Control (MPC) approach with self-learning capabilities for buildings. The proposed MPC is a key enabler of cooperative demand response strategies at community level, ensuring the allocation of an optimal demand profile at each participating member of the community according to an optimal consumption reference defined by a complementary agent at community level. In this way, the proposed solution can contribute to provide demand response services exploiting the unlocked residential flexibility. The MPC calculates the optimal setpoints of the HVAC system’s terminal units, considering the expected usage of the buildings and the outdoor conditions, and exploiting the building’s thermal inertia. The models embedded in the MPC are grey-box models representing a thermal zone of the building. An adaptive MPC is proposed to mitigate the high uncertainty present in building management due to the time-variant characteristics of the building and the uncertain internal heat gains due to occupancy and other disturbances. For that, the reduced models incorporate self-learning capabilities implemented as Moving Horizon Estimators that perform a continuous calibration based on real-time measurements. This solution allows full automation for model calibration and management of the terminal units. This paper presents a case study to assess the thermal comfort assurance and power flexibility provision potential of the proposed solution. First, the Building Optimizer is compared to a regular benchmark consisting of an on–off controller, evaluating the performance of each controller for indoor temperature tracking. For the assessment of the flexibility provision, a baseline MPC with fixed model parameters obtained by an offline calibration is used for comparison to the Building Optimizer with self-learning capabilities. Different flexibility scenarios are simulated, considering different restrictions regarding thermal comfort and various flexibility request signals. Notably, the Building Optimizer outperforms the baseline MPC in all scenarios, particularly guaranteeing thermal comfort. Incorporating self-learning capabilities enhances controller performance by mitigating the effect of uncertainty, allowing the Building Optimizer to shift up to 13.08% of peak periods into valley periods, and tracking a flexibility request scenario of 10% with no discomfort.